Sir Lancelot Holland

The close/distant blockade of ports, capital or not, is an integral part of Naval warfare, Brest and Cadiz were under blockade throughout the Napoleonic wars unless weather conditions demanded the blockading fleet move to open sea. Yet, the French and Spanish had options open to them. They could come out and fight, they could come out in force to run off the blockading Frigates, break the blockade as Admiral Villeneuve did more than once or they could sit in port as a fleet in being, knowing they could be supplied by land indefinitely. Were the positions reversed and had Great Britain's ports been under blockade it is very probable Great Britain would have lost the Napoleonic wars, Indeed twice during the 20th century, Great Britain, despite technically controlling the sea lanes could have lost both world wars. Such could have been the consequences of a successful naval blockade on an Island nation. The retention of new players is not in the hands of the devs, it is in the hands of the Veteran combat players, if you enter a fight and find yourself against a new player in his shiny new vanilla Merc while you have your tricked out speedboat Endy he is going to lose every time, he will get disheartened and leave the game believing he has no chance to advance in the game. Does it not make more sense to leave the new guy alone, take one of your new guys with you and let them sort it out between themselves, and if per chance another combat veteran intervenes and very likely, they will, there is your fight, with a player who has a better chance, who may give you something better than the slaughter of innocents. By doing this the New player win or lose would believe he has a chance of advancement in the game because he has learned that the combat vets are less likely to use him as pvp mark fodder, that they will stand aside and protect their protégé against his/her peers in opposing nations and would therefore be more likely to stay in the game. The new players learn how to fight in an even contest and the combat vet has the opportunity to win his PVP marks against a more equal opponent(s). Perhaps then it is beholden on the clan leaders of all nations to discuss with each other about at what level a new player should be capable of defending himself, and a gentleman's agreement that ships of the line will not engage frigates and below unless the frigate Captain opens fire first. This is more in keeping with the era in which we fight, such an agreement existed and was honoured by every combatant nation of the day. I think it would improve both new player retention and ensure in the case of ships of the line that they become more viable in their use and the battles they fight are more likely to be not only more even but more challenging, battles become the huge line ships slugging it out, but, with the small ships in their own peripheral battles within a battle.

Your point about ROE is valid and on point, in the 19th century it was considered to be ungentlemanly to engage small ships from a ship of the line, in was an unwritten rule that it was not done unless the lesser rated ship opened fire first. This rule was accepted by all nations, Officers who broke this rule were at risk of finding themselves on the beach, on half pay or even unpaid, their position as an Officer and Gentleman ruined in society. The transposition of 21st century values over the those imposed in the 19th century actually removes much of the ambience of a time when with a few exemptions the war at sea was fought with honour and courtesy by gentlemen who held a respected place in society,

I rather think that at about the rank of Lt.Cmdr a candidate may sit something like the Submarine Commanders 'Perisher' course, this would give candidates a benchmark as to where they are at in game and accelerated promotion. If the candidate failed he/she could still work their way through the ranks as normal albeit more slowly.

Choosing the build should be a part of the contract anyway, a responsible crafter would surely advise you on the optimal build, whether you choose to accept that or select a different option is solely your prerogative, after all, you, the client, would be placing a bespoke order for a ship. Some clients would place the matter in the hands of the crafter, others, like yourself would exercise more control over what you buy, either way it would be the clients choice.

They could, but they'd be out of business real fast once word got around, for example, if you bought a car from a dealership that persistently broke down you would not go to him for another, on top of that you'd tell your friends not to buy from him either. Anyone who trades anything is dependent on a good reputation, lose your reputation and you lose your business. It helps also to tell the crafter what you want exactly, if you tell him you want a commerce raiding Endy he would not build you a commerce raiding Indy. One should always remember the age old caveat buyer beware if you are not specific about what you need.

Yes that works if you want to buy a general purpose ship, but what if you want something more specialised? The crafters who craft numbers of ships would know which materials are best for speed, or tankiness, or any combination thereof surely if a client asked for a commerce raider a crafter would build a fast ship of the desired rate that is suitable for commerce raiding at an agreed price.

Bravo Zulu: Manoeuvre well executed / well done.

BZ Service humour at it's best.

you may also require: Affimative acknowledged astern beam bow conform to leaders movements enemy in sight form line astern/abeam/ echelon left/right negative not under control (meaning rudder jammed) port starboard quarter Most terms should be well known or make sense to most people, and can be transmitted using 1 or 2 letter or numerical codes or a combination of both making it a very fast means of communication. for example: a port turn could be port + course desired, manoeuvres could be form line astern or form line abeam port, sighting report could be enemy in sight starboard bow easily entered into chat with at most 2 letters and 3 numbers for course changes, i.e. Port numerical 270. 19th century flag signals were generally that simple

To a great degree it was self imposed, the code of honour, the possibility of being beached and disgraced was the deterrent, a number of pirates were former naval officers who had in some way broken the code of honour and resorted to a life of piracy, the sea was the only life many of them knew having been at sea from an early age, many Midshipmen were between 10 and 12 years of age, most never rose above the rank of Lieutenant.

Eighteenth/nineteenth Century warfare was renowned for it's voluntary conventions, especially at sea, these were the unwritten rules that governed warfare some of which still exist, for example enemy combatants were rescued if it was safe to do so and the rescuing ship could accommodate them. Captain Hans Langsdorff of the KMS Graf Spee earned a great deal of respect for the rescuing of survivors and his good treatment of those he saved as late as 1939. Among those conventions was that no Captain of a ship of the line would engage a ship smaller in rate unless the lesser rated ship opened fire first, it was considered to be an ungentlemanly act and respected by all sides in the Napoleonic war at sea. While such notions are for the most part neglected in todays society, such acts were considered to be civilised behaviour during the time this game is set, indeed a Captain who broke such conventions could find themselves beached on half pay or even unpaid, ostracised from civil society. Such was strength of society back then, it is why charges of behaviour contrary to good order and discipline, bringing the service into disrepute, and conduct unbecoming an Officer and Gentleman are among the highest number of General Courts Martial cases listed today. Perhaps rather than attempt to force a solution through mechanics we should look to a solution based on the unwritten rules of the time, rules that are still instilled by the honour system at Dartmouth, Annapolis, West Point and Sandhurst, all the National Officer training academies have some form of honour code. Perhaps there is a solution here?

Apologies, I responded to a comment that perhaps I should not of, be assured that Liam and I have discussed the matter in private and will not be posting further on the matter.

Sir, it is neither competitive, nor enjoyable, neither is it fair to be told in battle that you are sacrificial lambs in a personal vendetta against a member of a different clan. I would ask you why, you, as the clan HAVOC, not yourself personally, chose to fight what a HAVOC member admitted was a personal vendetta under Dutch Colours, against a clan that took no part (nor enjoyment) in your departure from GB. We fly the White Ensign and yes we are a legitimate target in war, that is fair, it is not fair to use war or pvp, or another Nations colours to settle personal grudges against an innocent clan, in place of the clan or persons responsible, It brings no honour to the Dutch as a Nation. It is truly a sad thing, as, when HAVOC and SALTP get into a fight outside of the confines of PB's or hostility raising, we can never now be certain as to whether it is in the spirit of competition and enjoyment or if it is an act of vengeance for act(s) allegedly committed by others beyond our control.

Thank you both for an interesting and informative video, I am curious, the action was clearly fought in a confined area, a channel with shallows on two sides, at several points the disablement of the rudder could have seen one or other grounded, or the ship manoeuvred in such a way as to force grounding, was this a consideration at any point in the battle? While I agree trying to force a grounding carries a risk to both Captains it may have given one a distinct advantage.

https://uk.search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?hspart=arh&hsimp=yhs-001&type=zxy_cb71d42d18d6909c2f&param1=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%3D%3D&param2=Nax5LGN5LGF5&p=hms+victory+paint+scheme Ironically that British Yellow was not worn by HMS Victory at Trafalgar, she originally wore a delicate shade of pink! Nelson's Chequerboard scheme was actually quite new at Trafalgar, and no doubt cost Captain Hardy a small fortune as he had to pay for the upkeep of his ship. This in the main was warships were painted black as black paint was cheap, Gold leaf as found on some warship's transoms was very expensive and gave way to Yellow paint, the pink paint would also have been expensive, although Black Paint may have been provided by the Admiralty a ships upkeep was largely borne by her Captain. It is not known if Nelson personally contributed to her upkeep, but as the flagship a high standard would have been expected and Nelson would almost certainly of had his say on colours worn by his flagship and the ships under his command.

Yes something like that, although if there were a way to name ships battle honours could become hereditary from name to name as they are in real navy's.

Indeed PB's are set piece, and rightly so, Screenings however are chance encounters or the result of good recon or intelligence, so yes one is set piece the other ow. The concept of using small ships to delay bigger ships until more powerful ships can take over is timeless, even the Greeks had that concept mastered to the degree that at Salamis the much smaller and inferior Greek fleet decimated the Persian fleet.

Set piece? no, but if a screening fleet locates and brings the enemy pb fleet to battle then they have done their job, when attacking a port there is always a risk that you will be found and brought to battle, it is a risk every battle commander has to accept.

It should be, Screening battle fleets is an integral part of naval warfare, even during the Napoleonic wars.

I see no problem with that at all, but sometimes Captain(s) distinguish themselves in combat, an award that does not affect gameplay makes them stand out, a pennant, flag or paint does not affect performance but recognises individual acts that sets a Captain apart from his/her peers, it is something to strive for, above and beyond what one could expect to get in the course of a battle. Even if it is a simple battle honour attached to the ship and her successors instills a sense of achievement, a sense of tradition which goes toward National, clan and personal prestige, a little extra content if you like.

Yet griefing saw Captain Kennedy of the Rawalpindi awarded the Victoria Cross for his action against Scharnhorst and Gneisenau! A merchant ship with 6" pop guns v 2 11" gun battlecruisers. Such courage and actions go unrewarded every day in our naval action.

Yes, Paints could be a part of it, as could distinctive pennants or flags to mark out Captains of note.

They do indeed sir, however they rarely get the recognition for their efforts. Perhaps an award of something similar to the Order of the Bath, or the Commander /Knight of the British empire, Order of the Garter, most of the European nations had some sort of recognition for those who performed their duties well. It does not have to have any affect on gameplay just recognise their efforts for their clan or nation.

The purpose of a screen is to protect the battle line, that is exactly what screeners in this game do. From time to time they get lucky, or through diligent reconnaissance detect the enemy's attacking force and engage that, either reducing the number of enemy ships entering the PB or sometimes all of them. They do this, often in inferior ships, knowing they may face high quality players with the best equipment for no reward except the knowledge they have done a good job for their fellow clans and nation. By all means reward them for their efforts, they contribute as much to the success of a port battle be it in defence or offence as the main battle fleet does, why should they not share in the rewards?

Espionage, usage of the ruse de guerre, reconnaissance have always been a part of warfare, and accepted as such. There us little to be done about them, spies when discovered in peacetime are either jailed or sent home as they usually hold diplomatic immunity, in war they are executed. Personally I would have an alt deal with them by sinking or running them off, would mistakes occur? Yes they would, every country that has held the death penalty has executed the innocent. If the Articles of War were the rules by which we play, then there should be a judicial system in place to prove guilt or innocence in such matters, we cannot of course execute, flog, dismiss them from the service but perhaps we could 'sentence' them to become outlaws, pirates for a period of time.